The arbitration process is usually faster and more flexible than traditional litigation, allowing a more accessible path to justice. However, even arbitration can sometimes take many months, which arbitration centres have been trying to counteract - as mentioned in our note on Dubai Arbitration Week 2025. The Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) introduced a streamlined mechanism in 2022 that allows disputes to be expedited to resolution. This procedure does so by expediting the appointment of a sole arbitrator within five days of the case being accepted, and the issuance of the final award within three months of the tribunal being constituted.
What are the expedited arbitration requirements in the DIAC?
The request for expedited proceedings may be granted under Article 32.1 of the DIAC Rules. Expedited proceedings may be ordered where:
a) the total of claims and counterclaims does not exceed AED 1,000,000,
b) the parties have agreed inwriting to an expedited procedure, or
c) there is “exceptional urgency,” as determined by the Arbitration Court upon a party’s application.
However, it is important to note that while the first two grounds are straightforward, the concept of exceptional urgency under Article 32.1(c) is undefined, meaning each application is determined on a case-by-case basis.
To determine how these arbitration cases are granted expedition, we can draw from other arbitration jurisdictions, including HKIAC, SIAC, LCIA, and TIAC (Tashkent International Arbitration Centre), all of which include similar concepts in their rules.
HKIAC & SIAC expedited arbitration process
Hong Kong has adopted a strict approach, applying a two-stage test: first, whether urgency exists, and second, whether the urgency is truly exceptional. Expedition has been granted when an imminent transaction deadline and a real risk of irreparable harm were present. However, in contrast, the HKIAC has rejected applications based solely on general financial distress, risk of insolvency without supporting detail, market volatility, or cases where the claimant had delayed before commencing arbitration.
Similar to the HKIAC, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) has allowed expedition under the same requirements as Hong Kong; however, they also include situations where a party could not perform third-party contracts, faced exposure to third-party liabilities, or where there was a real risk that assets needed to satisfy an eventual award would be dissipated. The SIAC’s focus is on the irreparability of any damages incurred through delaying arbitration, seeking to safeguard the parties from any permanent losses.
What are the LCIA expedited arbitration requirements?
The LCIA aligns closely with HKIAC and SIAC on the core principles but is distinct on one key factor: if damages are an adequate remedy, the LCIA will generally refuse an expedited tribunal. It grants expedition where there is asset dissipation, shareholder deadlock threatening corporate paralysis, forthcoming insolvency, or any risks to confidential intellectual property (see our article on the arbitration process in England & Wales for more.)
TIAC expedited arbitration process
Much like the LCIA, the TIAC values the current operations of any businesses involved in the dispute. The TIAC’s distinct focus is on whether a delay would make the arbitration process itself ineffective. Its process spotlights ongoing business operations, contractual performance, and asset preservation. The TIAC requires highly specific evidence of immediacy and irreversibility, and it does not treat urgency as exceptional unless a delay would practically defeat the purpose of arbitration.
Considerations for a successful application under DIAC
Although the DIAC Rules do not define exceptional urgency, institutional practice shows that the threshold is high. A successful application may require evidence of a genuine and immediate threat that cannot tolerate procedural delay, irreparable harm that cannot be adequately compensated by damages, a direct connection between the urgency and the need for an accelerated process, a demonstration of proportionality, and prompt action showing that the applicant has applied without delay.
Conclusion
Although DIAC does not define the term, guidance from HKIAC, SIAC, LCIA, and TIAC confirms that institutions apply a strict, fact-driven test focused on immediacy, irreversibility of harm, and proportionality. Any client considering an application for expedited proceedings must approach the process strategically, with carefully prepared evidence and a clear legal rationale. When used appropriately, expedited arbitration can provide swift and effective relief. When used tactically or without proper foundation, it is likely to fail. The potential harm to the applicant must outweigh prejudice to the respondent if the emergency relief is granted.
Please contact the experienced International Arbitration team at Barnes Law for advice on arbitration in Dubai.
Written by Barnes Law Managing Partner, Yulia Barnes.
